The document discusses open science and how it has transformed research and collaboration in several key ways:
- Data and research outputs are increasingly shared openly online in citable and contextualized ways to maximize their impact.
- Tools exist to support every stage of the research cycle from getting ideas to documenting findings.
- Funders increasingly require data to be shared openly to make publicly funded research a public good.
- Repositories provide places for researchers to store and organize different types of research data and outputs.
- Open science engages stakeholders throughout the entire research process from initial collaboration to downstream metrics and data publishing.
How to do quick user assign in kanban in Odoo 17 ERP
Biodiversity—A Healthy Ecosystem Thrives on Fresh Ideas (Part 1 of 3), Phil Jones
1. the how and the why of caring about open science
Phill Jones, PhD
Head of Publisher Outreach
Digital Science
@digitalsci
@phillbjones
p.jones@digital-science.com
2. “The publisher’s new job is to support researchers at
every stage of the research cycle” Annette Thomas
4. Data and as
research output
Citable and
engaged with
Web of contextual
references
Narrative as
supplement to data
5. Open Science ≠ Open Access
A body of work begins with an idea and
ends when the impact of that idea has
been maximized.
Institutional/funding needs
Research management software, reporting
Personal Impact
Altmetrics, Author profiles
Documentation of findings
Publications, Open data
Doing the Research
Digital Notebooks, Lab Management Software
Getting an Idea
Reference Managers, Social Reading
6. Barend Mons talking about the ‘European Open Science
Cloud’ at APE in January 2016
http://river-valley.zeeba.tv/media/conferences/ape-2016/0101-Barend-Mons/
11. Science is Increasingly International
Source: ‘The Fourth Age of Research’ by Jonathan Adams, Nature 497, 557
12. Source: Nature News, 19th December 2013
http://www.nature.com/news/scientists-losing-data-at-a-rapid-rate-1.14416
13. “Investigators are expected to share with other researchers, at no more than
incremental cost and within a reasonable time, the primary data, samples,
physical collections and other supporting materials created or gathered in
the course of work under NSF grants”
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/aag_6.jsp#VID4
“NEH is committed to timely and rapid data distribution”
http://www.neh.gov/files/grants/data_management_plans_2012.pdf
Publicly funded research data are a public good, produced in the
public interest, which should be made openly available with as few
restrictions as possible in a timely and responsible manner.
http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/DataPolicy/
14. Valen, Dan; Blanchat, Kelly (2015): Overview of OSTP Responses. figshare.
https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1367165.v7
January 2015 - according to Sherpa Juliet, 34
funders required data archiving, 16 encourage it
UK funder data archiving policies
US Governmental funders mandating data
deposits
Everybody needs a place
to put their data (and the
means to organize it)
15. Two approaches to data repositories
Structured
• Data is curated and standards are enforced
• Data is gathered with the aim of creating a
super-data set
• Easily machine readable
• Examples: Genbank, HEASARC
Unstructured
• All data types can be stored
• Varying degrees of curation
• Institutional, publisher, non-profit and private
offerings
• Not necessarily machine readable
• Examples: Figshare, Dryad, zenodo, Pure
16. Traditional Point of
Contact
Original Idea
Perform Research
Write Article
Submit
Reviews and Revisions
Point of Publication
Maximize Impact
Share Information
Upstream Engagement
• Collaborative Authorship
• Community Services
• Predictive data
Downstream Engagement
• COUNTER / usage stats
• Altmetrics
• Data publishing
Symplectic
17. From the bench compliance
Data Type
Fundref
GRID
ORCID
Integrated into workflow
Intuitive
Our system of scholarly communication is called publishing
It was created in the 17th century
If we designed it from scratch today what would it look like
Open science is how researchers can get credit for their work by ‘publishing’ their specific contributions. At every stage of the process, outputs can be published to the web and given a DOI, giving researchers more ways to define their impact and get promotions/jobs.
As a result, science has changed in scale. What used to be a cottage industry of a series of principle investigators managing small labs in isolation is changing into a global network of researchers contributing in various ways. For those of you involved in shaping policy, for example for grant programs or research assessment, I would urge you to consider how funders should modernize to accommodate this shift.
Here’s some hard evidence for that trend. The graphs here were put together by our consulting division at Digital Science. They show the total output of research articles in both the UK and the US, as well as the number that only have authors from that one country. As you can see, the proportion of domestic only papers is falling.
Funders pass mandates onto researchers, but provide no mechanism.
Researchers ask their librarians thereby creating an institutional market
As of January 2015, according to Sherpa Juliet, 34 funders globally required data archiving, 16 encourage it.